Immunogenicity of Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine for Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Undergoing Immunosuppressive Therapy

SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections after COVID-19 vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have an attenuated serologic response to COVID-19 vaccination. It is unclear whether an impaired immune response in vaccinated IBD patients impacts the susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and occurrence of severe COVID-19.

Objectives

To evaluate SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection rates and the disease course of COVID-19 in vaccinated IBD patients.

Design

A systematic literature search and meta-analysis was performed.

Data sources and methods

The search was performed in Embase, Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and CINAHIL. The articles were independently screened and selected by two reviewers. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled relative risk for breakthrough infections in vaccinated IBD patients and controls.

Results

A total of 16 studies were included, with study periods ranging from January 2020 to October 2021 and follow-up time from 3 weeks to 6 months. The breakthrough infection rates range from 0 to 37.4% in vaccinated IBD patients. The disease course of COVID-19 was generally mild, with low hospitalization and mortality rates (0-8.7% and 0-4.3%, respectively). Vaccinated IBD patients had a significantly lower relative risk of breakthrough infection rate compared to unvaccinated controls (risk ratio: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.03-0.18). No difference was observed between IBD patients and non-IBD controls, and between partially and fully vaccinated IBD patients. The impact of immunosuppressive therapy on breakthrough infection rates differs between studies. Most studies showed no impact from immunosuppressive treatment, anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha or corticosteroids and other biologics; one study reported higher rates for patients treated with infliximab versus vedolizumab.

Conclusion

Vaccination is effective to prevent COVID-19 infections in patients with IBD. Breakthrough infections do occur, but the disease course is generally mild. Available data seem to suggest a declining trend of breakthrough infections during calendar time.

Registration

The protocol was published in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021292853).

Expert consensus on vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in Japan

Immunosuppressive therapies can affect the immune response to or safety of vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The appropriateness of vaccination should be assessed prior to the initiation of IBD treatment because patients with IBD frequently undergo continuous treatment with immunosuppressive drugs. This consensus was developed to support the decision-making process regarding appropriate vaccination for pediatric and adult patients with IBD and physicians by providing critical information according to the published literature and expert consensus about vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) [excluding cervical cancer and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)] in Japan. This consensus includes 19 important clinical questions (CQs) on the following 4 topics: VPDs (6 CQs), live attenuated vaccines (2 CQs), inactivated vaccines (6 CQs), and vaccination for pregnancy, childbirth, and breastfeeding (5 CQs). These topics and CQs were selected under unified consensus by the members of a committee on intractable diseases with support by a Health and Labour Sciences Research Grant. Physicians should provide necessary information on VPDs to their patients with IBD and carefully manage these patients' IBD if various risk factors for the development or worsening of VPDs are present. This consensus will facilitate informed and shared decision-making in daily IBD clinical practice.

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations fail to elicit humoral and cellular immune responses in patients with multiple sclerosis receiving fingolimod

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination of healthy individuals is highly immunogenic and protective against severe COVID-19. However, there are limited data on how disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) alter SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine immunogenicity in patients with autoimmune diseases.

METHODS

As part of a prospective cohort study, we investigated the induction, stability and boosting of vaccine-specific antibodies, B cells and T cells in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) on different DMTs after homologous primary, secondary and booster SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations. Of 126 patients with MS analysed, 105 received either anti-CD20-based B cell depletion (aCD20-BCD), fingolimod, interferon-β, dimethyl fumarate, glatiramer acetate, teriflunomide or natalizumab, and 21 were untreated MS patients for comparison.

RESULTS

In contrast to all other MS patients, and even after booster, most aCD20-BCD- and fingolimod-treated patients showed no to markedly reduced anti-S1 IgG, serum neutralising activity and a lack of receptor binding domain-specific and S2-specific B cells. Patients receiving fingolimod additionally lacked spike-reactive CD4+ T cell responses. The duration of fingolimod treatment, rather than peripheral blood B and T cell counts prior to vaccination, determined whether a humoral immune response was elicited.

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of immunogenicity under long-term fingolimod treatment demonstrates that functional immune responses require not only immune cells themselves, but also access of these cells to the site of inoculation and their unimpeded movement. The absence of humoral and T cell responses suggests that fingolimod-treated patients with MS are at risk for severe SARS-CoV-2 infections despite booster vaccinations, which is highly relevant for clinical decision-making and adapted protective measures, particularly considering additional recently approved sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor antagonists for MS treatment.

COVID-19 vaccination in patients receiving allergen immunotherapy (AIT) or biologicals-EAACI recommendations

Immune modulation is a key therapeutic approach for allergic diseases, asthma and autoimmunity. It can be achieved in an antigen-specific manner via allergen immunotherapy (AIT) or in an endotype-driven approach using biologicals that target the major pathways of the type 2 (T2) immune response: immunoglobulin (Ig)E, interleukin (IL)-5 and IL-4/IL-13 or non-type 2 response: anti-cytokine antibodies and B-cell depletion via anti-CD20. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination provides an excellent opportunity to tackle the global pandemics and is currently being applied in an accelerated rhythm worldwide. The vaccine exerts its effects through immune modulation, induces and amplifies the response against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Thus, as there may be a discernible interference between these treatment modalities, recommendations on how they should be applied in sequence are expected. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) assembled an expert panel under its Research and Outreach Committee (ROC). This expert panel evaluated the evidence and have formulated recommendations on the administration of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with allergic diseases and asthma receiving AIT or biologicals. The panel also formulated recommendations for COVID-19 vaccine in association with biologicals targeting the type 1 or type 3 immune response. In formulating recommendations, the panel evaluated the mechanisms of COVID-19 infection, of COVID-19 vaccine, of AIT and of biologicals and considered the data published for other anti-infectious vaccines administered concurrently with AIT or biologicals.

Immunogenicity of BNT162b2 Vaccine Booster Dose in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Receiving Infliximab Combination Therapy: A Prospective Observational Study

Introduction

Few data exist regarding the immunogenicity of the third dose of BNT162b2 relative to the second dose in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on different immunosuppressive therapies. We investigated the immunogenicity of BNT162b2 vaccine booster dose in patients with IBD on infliximab combination therapy.

Method

This is a prospective single-center observational study conducted from January 1, 2022 to February 28, 2022. Patients were recruited at the time of attendance at the infusion center. Eligibility criteria included patients with a confirmed diagnosis of IBD who are receiving infliximab with azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine. Patients who received two doses of BNT162b2 vaccine (second dose group) were compared to patients who had received three doses of BNT162b2 vaccine [third dose (booster) group]. Patients were excluded if they were infected or had symptoms of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) previously since the start of the pandemic or received other vaccines than the BNT162b2. Our primary outcome was the concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies Immunoglobulin G (IgG) and neutralizing antibodies 40–45 weeks from the first dose of BNT162b2 vaccine in patients with IBD receiving infliximab combination therapy. Medians with interquartile range (IQR) were calculated.

Results

In total, 162 patients with IBD and receiving infliximab combination therapy were recruited, and the number of patients in both the second dose group and third dose (booster) group was 81. Mean age was 35 years old in both groups. Median (IQR) SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels were significantly lower after the second dose [125 BAU/ml (43, 192)] compared to patients who received the third booster dose [207 BAU/ml (181, 234)] (P = 0.003). Neutralizing antibody levels were also lower after the second dose [80% (21, 95)] compared to patients who received the third booster dose [96% (93, 99)] (P ≤ 0.001). The percentage of patients who achieved positive SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels in the third (booster) dose group was 96.3%, whereas it was 86.4% in the second dose group. The percentage of participants who received the third (booster) dose and achieved a positive SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibody level was 100%, whereas it was 88.9% in the participants who received the second dose only.

Conclusion

Most patients with IBD on infliximab combination therapy had positive SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralizing antibody concentrations 40–45 weeks post BNT162b2 vaccination. However, SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralizing antibody concentrations were lower in patients who received two doses only compared to patients who received a third dose. A longer follow-up study is needed to evaluate decay in antibodies over time.

Boosting corrects a memory B cell defect in SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-vaccinated patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Immunosuppressed patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) generate lower amounts of SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies after mRNA vaccination than healthy controls. We assessed SARS-CoV-2 spike S1 receptor binding domain–specific (S1-RBD–specific) B lymphocytes to identify the underlying cellular defects. Patients with IBD produced fewer anti–S1-RBD antibody–secreting B cells than controls after the first mRNA vaccination and lower amounts of total and neutralizing antibodies after the second. S1-RBD–specific memory B cells were generated to the same degree in IBD and control groups and were numerically stable for 5 months. However, the memory B cells in patients with IBD had a lower S1-RBD–binding capacity than those in controls, which is indicative of a defect in antibody affinity maturation. Administration of a third shot to patients with IBD elevated serum antibodies and generated memory B cells with a normal antigen-binding capacity. These results show that patients with IBD have defects in the formation of antibody-secreting B cells and affinity-matured memory B cells that are corrected by a third vaccination.

Response to COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Biological Treatment

Background: The antibody response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on biological drugs is still unclear. Aim: To determine the anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike 1 (anti-S1-IgG) response rate and antibody levels following a complete COVID-19 vaccination cycle in patients with IBD on biological treatment. Methods: We assessed antibody response to COVID-19 in consecutive patients with IBD on biological drugs and without prior exposure to COVID-19. Sera were prospectively collected at baseline and at 21 days (T1), 42 days (T2), and 3 months (T3) after the first vaccine dose. Results: Among the 42 patients included in the study, the overall response rate at T3 was 97.6%, with no difference across the various biological drugs. After the first dose (T1), the response rate was higher in patients receiving anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) compared to patients treated with other biologics (p = 0.031). Among the responders, the anti-S1 levels were not significantly different among the various biological drugs at all study timepoints. Concomitant corticosteroids and disease activity had no impact on the response rate at all study timepoints. No unexpected side events were observed. Discussion: The antibody response to vaccination against COVID-19 in patients with IBD on biological drugs is optimal, independently of their mechanism of action. Patients treated with anti-TNF seem to have an earlier response to vaccination, while concomitant low-dose corticosteroids and disease activity does not seem to impact response. This information can be used to program vaccination and inform patients.

Lower Serologic Response to COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases Treated With Anti-TNFα

BACKGROUND & AIM

Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), specifically those treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)α biologics, are at high risk for vaccine-preventable infections. Their ability to mount adequate vaccine responses is unclear. The aim of the study was to assess serologic responses to messenger RNA-Coronavirus Disease 2019 vaccine, and safety profile, in patients with IBD stratified according to therapy, compared with healthy controls (HCs).

METHODS

Prospective, controlled, multicenter Israeli study. Subjects enrolled received 2 BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) doses. Anti-spike antibody levels and functional activity, anti-TNFα levels and adverse events (AEs) were detected longitudinally.

RESULTS

Overall, 258 subjects: 185 IBD (67 treated with anti-TNFα, 118 non-anti-TNFα), and 73 HCs. After the first vaccine dose, all HCs were seropositive, whereas ∼7% of patients with IBD, regardless of treatment, remained seronegative. After the second dose, all subjects were seropositive, however anti-spike levels were significantly lower in anti-TNFα treated compared with non-anti-TNFα treated patients, and HCs (both P < .001). Neutralizing and inhibitory functions were both lower in anti-TNFα treated compared with non-anti-TNFα treated patients, and HCs (P < .03; P < .0001, respectively). Anti-TNFα drug levels and vaccine responses did not affect anti-spike levels. Infection rate (∼2%) and AEs were comparable in all groups. IBD activity was unaffected by BNT162b2.

CONCLUSIONS

In this prospective study in patients with IBD stratified according to treatment, all patients mounted serologic response to 2 doses of BNT162b2; however, its magnitude was significantly lower in patients treated with anti-TNFα, regardless of administration timing and drug levels. Vaccine was safe. As vaccine serologic response longevity in this group may be limited, vaccine booster dose should be considered.

Reduced antibody activity against SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 delta virus in serum of mRNA-vaccinated individuals receiving tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Although vaccines effectively prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in healthy individuals, they appear to be less immunogenic in individuals with chronic inflammatory disease (CID) or receiving chronic immunosuppression therapy.

METHODS

Here we assessed a cohort of 77 individuals with CID treated as monotherapy with chronic immunosuppressive drugs for antibody responses in serum against historical and variant severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viruses after immunization with the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine.

FINDINGS

Longitudinal analysis showed the greatest reductions in neutralizing antibodies and Fc effector function capacity in individuals treated with tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors (TNFi), and this pattern appeared to be worse against the B.1.617.2 delta virus. Within 5 months of vaccination, serum neutralizing titers of all TNFi-treated individuals tested fell below the presumed threshold correlate for antibody-mediated protection. However, TNFi-treated individuals receiving a third mRNA vaccine dose boosted their serum neutralizing antibody titers by more than 16-fold.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccine boosting or administration of long-acting prophylaxis (e.g., monoclonal antibodies) will likely be required to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in this susceptible population.

FUNDING

This study was supported by grants and contracts from the NIH (R01 AI157155, R01AI151178, and HHSN75N93019C00074; NIAID Centers of Excellence for Influenza Research and Response (CEIRR) contracts HHSN272201400008C and 75N93021C00014; and Collaborative Influenza Vaccine Innovation Centers [CIVIC] contract 75N93019C00051).

Review Article: vaccination for patients with inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Poor immune responses are frequently observed in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving established vaccines; risk factors include immunosuppressants and active disease.

AIMS

To summarise available information regarding immune responses achieved in patients with IBD receiving established vaccines. Using this information, to identify risk factors in the IBD population related to poor vaccine-induced immunity that may be applicable to vaccines against COVID-19.

METHODS

We undertook a literature review on immunity to currently recommended vaccines for patients with IBD and to COVID-19 vaccines and summarised the relevant literature.

RESULTS

Patients with IBD have reduced immune responses following vaccination compared to the general population. Factors including the use of immunomodulators and anti-TNF agents reduce response rates. Patients with IBD should be vaccinated against COVID-19 at the earliest opportunity as recommended by International Advisory Committees, and vaccination should not be deferred because a patient is receiving immune-modifying therapies. Antibody titres to COVID-19 vaccines appear to be reduced in patients receiving anti-TNF therapy, especially in combination with immunomodulators after one vaccination. Therefore, we should optimise any established risk factors that could impact response to vaccination in patients with IBD before vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Ideally, patients with IBD should be vaccinated at the earliest opportunity against COVID-19. Patients should be in remission and, if possible, have their corticosteroid dose minimised before vaccination. Further research is required to determine the impact of different biologics on vaccine response to COVID-19 and the potential for booster vaccines or heterologous prime-boost vaccinations in the IBD population.

Impairment of CD4+ T and Memory B Cell Responses but Normal Memory CD8+T-Cell Activation on Crohn's Disease after COVID-19 Vaccination: A Twin Case

Vaccines to prevent the impact of SARS-CoV-2 are now available, including for patients with autoimmune diseases. However, there is no information about how inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treatment could impact the cellular and humoral immune responses. This study evaluated SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral and cellular responses after vaccination with a two-dose schedule in a Crohn’s disease patient treated with Infliximab (10 mg/kg); we included comparisons with a monozygotic twin. The results showed that the Crohn’s disease’s twin (twin 2) had no antibody detection and reduced activation of CD4+ T cell responses, unlike the twin without the autoimmune disease (twin 1). Twin 2 developed antigen-specific central memory CD8+ T-cells and IFNγ production after the second dose of COVID-19 vaccination, similar to twin 1. These findings elucidated the role of T-cell immunity after COVID-19 immunization on IBD patients despite the lack of antibody production. Finally, our observation supports the consensus recommendation for IBD patients to receive COVID-19 vaccines.

T Cell Response After SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Immunocompromised Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Vaccination is a promising strategy to protect vulnerable groups like immunocompromised inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] patients from an infection with SARS-CoV-2. These patients may have lower immune responses. Little is known about the cellular and humoral immune response after a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in IBD patients.

METHODS

Totals of 28 patients with IBD and 27 age- and sex-matched healthy controls were recruited at Jena University Hospital. Blood samples were taken before, after the first, and in a subgroup of 11 patients after second dose of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Cellular immune response, including IFN-γ and TNF-α response and antibody titres, were analysed.

RESULTS

Overall, 71.4% of the IBD patients and 85.2% of the controls showed levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies above the cutoff of 33.8 BAU/ml [p = 0.329] after the first dose. Even in the absence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, IBD patients showed significant T cell responses after first SARS-CoV-2 vaccination compared with healthy controls, which was not influenced by different immunosuppressive regimens. Associated with the vaccination, we could also detect a slight increase of the TNF production among SARS-CoV-2-reactive TH cells in healthy donorsn [HD] and IBD patients. After the second dose of vaccination, in IBD patients a further increase of humoral immune response in all but one patient was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Already after the first dose of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, cellular immune response in IBD patients is comparable to controls, indicating a similar efficacy. However, close monitoring of long-term immunity in these patients should be considered.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for Immunizations in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)-Part 2: Inactivated Vaccines

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The effectiveness and safety of vaccinations can be altered by immunosuppressive therapies, and perhaps by inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) itself. These recommendations developed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and endorsed by the American Gastroenterological Association, aim to provide guidance on immunizations in adult and pediatric patients with IBD. This publication focused on inactivated vaccines.

METHODS

Systematic reviews evaluating the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of vaccines in patients with IBD, other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, and the general population were performed. Critical outcomes included mortality, vaccine-preventable diseases, and serious adverse events. Immunogenicity was considered a surrogate outcome for vaccine efficacy. Certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Key questions were developed through an iterative online platform, and voted on by a multidisciplinary group. Recommendations were formulated using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. Strong recommendation means that most patients should receive the recommended course of action, whereas a conditional recommendation means that different choices will be appropriate for different patients.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 15 of 20 questions. Recommendations address the following vaccines: Haemophilus influenzae type b, recombinant zoster, hepatitis B, influenza, pneumococcus, meningococcus, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis, and human papillomavirus. Most of the recommendations for patients with IBD are congruent with the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommendations for the general population, with the following exceptions. In patients with IBD, the panel suggested Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine for patients older than 5 years of age, recombinant zoster vaccine for adults younger than 50 year of age, and hepatitis B vaccine for adults without a risk factor. Consensus was not reached, and recommendations were not made for 5 statements, due largely to lack of evidence, including double-dose hepatitis B vaccine, timing of influenza immunization in patients on biologics, pneumococcal and meningococcal vaccines in adult patients without risk factors, and human papillomavirus vaccine in patients aged 27-45 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IBD may be at increased risk of some vaccine-preventable diseases. Therefore, maintaining appropriate vaccination status in these patients is critical to optimize patient outcomes. In general, IBD is not a contraindication to the use of inactivated vaccines, but immunosuppressive therapy may reduce vaccine responses.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for Immunizations in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)-Part 2: Inactivated Vaccines

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The effectiveness and safety of vaccinations can be altered by immunosuppressive therapies, and perhaps by inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) itself. These recommendations developed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and endorsed by the American Gastroenterological Association, aim to provide guidance on immunizations in adult and pediatric patients with IBD. This publication focused on inactivated vaccines.

METHODS

Systematic reviews evaluating the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of vaccines in patients with IBD, other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, and the general population were performed. Critical outcomes included mortality, vaccine-preventable diseases, and serious adverse events. Immunogenicity was considered a surrogate outcome for vaccine efficacy. Certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Key questions were developed through an iterative online platform, and voted on by a multidisciplinary group. Recommendations were formulated using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. Strong recommendation means that most patients should receive the recommended course of action, whereas a conditional recommendation means that different choices will be appropriate for different patients.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 15 of 20 questions. Recommendations address the following vaccines: Haemophilus influenzae type b, recombinant zoster, hepatitis B, influenza, pneumococcus, meningococcus, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis, and human papillomavirus. Most of the recommendations for patients with IBD are congruent with the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommendations for the general population, with the following exceptions. In patients with IBD, the panel suggested Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine for patients older than 5 years of age, recombinant zoster vaccine for adults younger than 50 year of age, and hepatitis B vaccine for adults without a risk factor. Consensus was not reached, and recommendations were not made for 5 statements, due largely to lack of evidence, including double-dose hepatitis B vaccine, timing of influenza immunization in patients on biologics, pneumococcal and meningococcal vaccines in adult patients without risk factors, and human papillomavirus vaccine in patients aged 27-45 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IBD may be at increased risk of some vaccine-preventable diseases. Therefore, maintaining appropriate vaccination status in these patients is critical to optimize patient outcomes. In general, IBD is not a contraindication to the use of inactivated vaccines, but immunosuppressive therapy may reduce vaccine responses.

A Review of the Efficacy of Influenza Vaccination in Autoimmune Disease Patients

Patients suffering from autoimmune diseases appear to be at greater risk for developing infections with the influenza virus compared to healthy controls due to their immunosuppressive treatment, suggesting the importance of vaccination. Within this literature review, we highlight the importance, efficacy, and safety of influenza vaccination in individuals with autoimmune diseases, including systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), Sjogren syndrome (SS), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Overall, vaccination is generally well tolerated by SLE patients and the literature recommends the inactivated influenza vaccine to SLE patients according to the recommendations and schedules for the general population and annually against seasonal influenza viruses. While the data are still unclear in patients with SS, there does seem to be a general consensus to vaccinate these individuals to prevent harmful risks of influenza disease. In patients with RA and IBD, vaccination efficacy with the inactivated influenza vaccine should be determined on a case-by-case basis, taking patient therapy into account. In light of the current pandemic and global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis, it is crucial to emphasize the safety and immunogenicity of influenza vaccination in vulnerable individuals suffering from autoimmune diseases. Public health measures are recommended to protect these individuals with vaccinations, keeping in mind the possibility of the multiple COVID-19 vaccines that are currently available.

Vaccines in Children with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Brief Review

Incidence of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), including Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), is increasing worldwide. Children with IBDs have a dysfunctional immune system and they are frequently treated with immunomodulating drugs and biological therapy, which significantly impair immune system functions and lead to an increased risk of infections. Vaccines are essential to prevent at least part of these infections and this explains why strict compliance to the immunization guidelines specifically prepared for IBD patients is strongly recommended. However, several factors might lead to insufficient immunization. In this paper, present knowledge on the use of vaccines in children with IBDs is discussed. Literature review showed that despite a lack of detailed quantification of the risk of infections in children with IBDs, these children might have infections more frequently than age-matched healthy subjects, and at least in some cases, these infections might be even more severe. Fortunately, most of these infections could be prevented when recommended schedules of immunization are carefully followed. Vaccines given to children with IBDs generally have adequate immunogenicity and safety. Attention must be paid to live attenuated vaccines that can be administered only to children without or with mild immune system function impairment. Vaccination of their caregivers is also recommended. Unfortunately, compliance to these recommendations is generally low and multidisciplinary educational programs to improve vaccination coverage must be planned, in order to protect children with IBD from vaccine-preventable diseases.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in IBD: Past Lessons, Current Evidence, and Future Challenges

Since the beginning of the pandemic, patients with inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] have been considered at high risk for infection and complications of COVID-19. IBD patients and patients taking immunosuppressive therapy were excluded from clinical phase III vaccine trials, complicating the assessment of effectiveness of these new vaccines. From past experience we know that adapted vaccination strategies may be appropriate in some IBD patients to optimise immunogenicity. We review current evidence on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination relevant to IBD patients, including immune responses from humoral to cellular, emerging data on new variants, and off-label vaccination schemes. We also identify clinical and scientific knowledge gaps that can be translated into both large-scale population-based studies and targeted vaccine studies to describe the precise immune responses induced by SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in IBD patients. We strongly endorse the recommendation of vaccinating IBD patients to ensure maximal protection from COVID-19 both for the individual and the community.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a British Society of Gastroenterology Inflammatory Bowel Disease section and IBD Clinical Research Group position statement

SARS-CoV-2 has caused a global health crisis and mass vaccination programmes provide the best opportunity for controlling transmission and protecting populations. Despite the impressive clinical trial results of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford/AstraZeneca), and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines, important unanswered questions remain, especially in patients with pre-existing conditions. In this position statement endorsed by the British Society of Gastroenterology Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) section and IBD Clinical Research Group, we consider SARS-CoV-2 vaccination strategy in patients with IBD. The risks of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are anticipated to be very low, and we strongly support SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with IBD. Based on data from previous studies with other vaccines, there are conceptual concerns that protective immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination may be diminished in some patients with IBD, such as those taking anti-TNF drugs. However, the benefits of vaccination, even in patients treated with anti-TNF drugs, are likely to outweigh these theoretical concerns. Key areas for further research are discussed, including vaccine hesitancy and its effect in the IBD community, the effect of immunosuppression on vaccine efficacy, and the search for predictive biomarkers of vaccine success.

What Do Influenza and COVID-19 Represent for Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease?

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are a group of immune and inflammatory diseases; and patients seem to be more vulnerable to influenza and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). These conditions are characterized by the augmented release of inflammatory cytokines that have been suggested as potential triggers for the acute respiratory distress syndrome, which may favor severe and even fatal outcomes. For these reasons, this review aims to evaluate what influenza and COVID-19 may represent for patients with IBD.

METHODS

The search was performed in MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to build the review.

RESULTS

The conventional therapies used by IBD patients may also interfere in the outcomes of influenza and COVID-19. Immune-suppressors agents are associated with a higher risk of infections due to the inhibition of intracellular signals necessary to the host act against pathogens. On the other hand, drugs related to the suppression of the production of cytokines in IBD could bring benefits to reduce mucosal inflammation, and for preventing pneumonia. Moreover, coronaviruses can bind to the target cells through angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2) receptor that is expressed in epithelial cells of the lung and largely the colon and the terminal ileum suggesting that human intestinal tract could be an alternative route for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

CONCLUSIONS

Once the cytokine storm observed in influenza and COVID-19 is similar to the cytokine pattern observed in IBD patients during the disease flares, the advice is that avoiding the infections is still an optimal option for IBD subjects.

An evidence-based guide to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination of patients on immunotherapies in dermatology

Immune-mediated diseases and immunotherapeutics can negatively affect normal immune functioning and, consequently, vaccine safety and response. The COVID-19 pandemic has incited research aimed at developing a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine. As SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are developed and made available, the assessment of anticipated safety and efficacy in patients with immune-mediated dermatologic diseases and requiring immunosuppressive and/or immunomodulatory therapy is particularly important. A review of the literature was conducted by a multidisciplinary committee to provide guidance on the safety and efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for dermatologists and other clinicians when prescribing immunotherapeutics. The vaccine platforms being used to develop SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are expected to be safe and potentially effective for dermatology patients on immunotherapeutics. Current guidelines for the vaccination of an immunocompromised host remain appropriate when considering future administration of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

Influenza vaccination in immunocompromised populations: Strategies to improve immunogenicity

Immunocompromised individuals are at high risk of severe illness and complications from influenza infection. For this reason, immunization using inactivated influenza vaccines is recommended for transplant patients, individuals receiving immunosuppressant treatments, and other persons with immunodeficiency. However, these immunocompromised populations are more likely to have lower and non-protective responses to annual vaccination with a standard influenza vaccine. Here, we review strategies aimed to improve the immunogenicity of influenza vaccines in immunocompromised populations. The different strategies employed have included adjuvanted vaccines, high-dose vaccines, booster doses, intradermal vaccination, and temporary discontinuation of immunosuppressant treatment regimens. High-dose trivalent, inactivated, split-virus influenza vaccine (IIV3-HD) is so far one of the leading strategies for improving vaccine responses in HIV patients, transplant patients, and persons receiving immunosuppressant therapies for inflammatory diseases. Several studies in these populations have shown stronger humoral responses with IIV3-HD than existing standard-dose trivalent vaccine, and comparable safety. Accordingly, some scientific societies have stated that high-dose influenza vaccine could be a preferred option for immunocompromised patients. However, larger randomized controlled studies are needed to validate relative immunogenicity and safety of IIV3-HD and other enhanced vaccines and vaccination strategies in immunocompromised individuals.

Optimizing Immunization Strategies in Patients with IBD

Recent advances in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) include the use of immune modifiers and monoclonal antibodies, such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF) alpha inhibitors, anti-integrin agents, janus kinase inhibitors, and interleukin-12/23 inhibitors. These agents achieve higher rates of clinical remission and mucosal healing than conventional therapy. However, these therapies increase the risk of infections, including some vaccine-preventable diseases. Infections are one of the most common adverse event of immunosuppressive therapy. Thus, providers should optimize immunization strategies to reduce the risk of vaccine-preventable infections in patients with IBD. There are several newly licensed vaccines recommended for adults by the US Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. This review will focus on how gastroenterology providers can implement the adult immunization schedule approved by ACIP for patients with IBD.

Second Mexican consensus on biologic therapy and small-molecule inhibitors in inflammatory bowel disease

INTRODUCTION

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic and incurable entity. Therapy with anti-TNF-α agents was the first biologic therapy approved in Mexico for IBD. New biologic agents, such as vedolizumab and ustekinumab, have recently been added, as have small-molecule inhibitors.

AIM

To update the biologic therapeutic approach to IBD in Mexico with new anti-TNF-α agents and novel biologics whose mechanisms of action induce and maintain remission of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis (UC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Mexican specialists in the areas of gastroenterology and inflammatory bowel disease were summoned to participate. The consensus was divided into 3 modules, with 49 statements. The Delphi method was applied, sending the statements to all participants to be analyzed and edited, before the face-to-face meeting. During said meeting, the clinical studies were shown, emphasizing the level of clinical evidence, and the final discussion and voting round on the level of agreement of all the statements was conducted.

RESULTS

In this second Mexican consensus, recommendations are made for new anti-TNF-α agents, such as golimumab, new biologics with other mechanisms of action, such as vedolizumab and ustekinumab, as well as for the small-molecule inhibitor, tofacitinib.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated recommendations focus on patient-reported outcomes, biologic therapy, small-molecule inhibitors, and the safety aspects of each of the drugs.

High Immunogenicity to Influenza Vaccination in Crohn's Disease Patients Treated with Ustekinumab

Influenza vaccination can be less effective in patients treated with immunosuppressive therapy. However, little is known about the effects of ustekinumab; an anti-IL-12/23 agent used to treat Crohn's disease (CD), on vaccination response. In this prospective study, we assessed immune responses to seasonal influenza vaccination in CD patients treated with ustekinumab compared to CD patients treated with anti-TNFα therapy (adalimumab) and healthy controls. Humoral responses were assessed with hemagglutinin inhibition (HI) assays. Influenza-specific total CD3+, CD3+CD4+, and CD3+CD8+ T-cell responses were measured with flow cytometry. Fifteen patients treated with ustekinumab; 12 with adalimumab and 20 healthy controls were vaccinated for seasonal influenza in September 2018. Seroprotection rates against all vaccine strains in the ustekinumab group were high and comparable to healthy controls. Seroconversion rates were comparable, and for A/H3N2 highest in the ustekinumab group. HI titers were significantly higher in the ustekinumab group and healthy controls than in the adalimumab group for the B/Victoria strain. Post-vaccination T-cell responses in the ustekinumab group were similar to healthy controls. One-month post-vaccination proliferation of CD3+CD8+ T-cells was highest in the ustekinumab group. In conclusion, ustekinumab does not impair immune responses to inactivated influenza vaccination. Therefore, CD patients treated with ustekinumab can be effectively vaccinated for seasonal influenza.

Vaccination in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Utility and Future Perspective

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an immune-mediated disease, which often require lifetime treatment with immunomodulators and immunosuppressive drugs. Both IBD and its treatments are associated with an increased risk of infectious disease and mortality. Several of these diseases are vaccine preventable and could be avoided, reducing morbidity and mortality. However, vaccination rates among patients with IBD are lower than in the general population and both patients and doctors are not fully aware of the problem. Education campaigns and well planned vaccination schemes are necessary to improve vaccination coverage in patients with IBD. Immunomodulators and immunosuppressive drugs may reduce the seroprotection levels. For this reason, new vaccination schemes are being studied in patients with IBD. It is therefore important to understand which and when vaccines can be administrated based on immunocompetence or immunosuppression of patients. Usually, live-attenuated vaccines should be avoided in immunosuppressed patients, so assessing vaccination status and planning vaccination before immunosuppressive treatments are pivotal to reduce infection risk. The aim of this review is to increase the awareness of the problem and provide a quick reference for vaccination plan tailoring, especially for gastroenterologists and primary care physicians, who have the skills and knowledge to implement vaccination strategies.

Immunogenicity of High Dose Influenza Vaccine for Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Anti-TNF Monotherapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF) agents may have lower immune response to the influenza vaccine. We aimed to evaluate the immunogenicity of the high dose (HD) vs standard dose (SD) influenza vaccine in patients with IBD on anti-TNF monotherapy.

METHODS

We performed a randomized clinical trial at a single academic center evaluating the immunogenicity of the HD vs SD influenza vaccine in patients with IBD on anti-TNF monotherapy. Influenza antibody concentration was measured at immunization, at 2 to 4 weeks postimmunization, and at 6 months.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients with IBD were recruited into the study, 40 on anti-TNF monotherapy, and 19 on vedolizumab, along with 20 healthy controls (HC). Patients with IBD receiving the HD influenza vaccine had significantly higher H3N2 postimmunization antibodies compared with those who received the SD influenza vaccine (160 [interquartile range 80 to 320] vs 80 [interquartile range 40 to 160]; P = 0.003). The H1N1 postimmunization levels were not significantly higher in the HD influenza vaccine (320 [interquartile range 150 to 320] vs 160 [interquartile range 80 to 320]; P = 0.18). Patients with IBD receiving the HD influenza vaccine and those on vedolizumab who received SD had equivalent antibody concentrations to HC (H1N1 P = 0.85; H3N2 P = 0.23; B/Victoria P = 0.20 and H1N1 P = 0.46; H3N2 P = 0.21; B/Victoria P = 1.00, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IBD on anti-TNF monotherapy receiving the HD influenza vaccine had significantly higher postimmunization antibody levels compared with SD vaccine. Clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT02461758).

Updates on vaccinating the inflammatory bowel disease patient

Many of the therapeutic options for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) suppress the immune system, which increases the risk of certain infections in these patients. Effective vaccines exist and offer protection against a number of infectious diseases. However, data has shown that IBD patients are inadequately vaccinated and, as a result, are at risk of developing certain preventable infections. Furthermore, gastroenterologists' knowledge regarding the appropriate immunizations to administer to their IBD patients is suboptimal. Areas covered: Over the past several years, there has been a considerable amount of research contributing to our knowledge regarding vaccination of patients with IBD. Expert opinion: This updated review article focuses on the current immunization schedule for the IBD patient and stresses the important role of the gastroenterologist as an active participant in the health maintenance of their IBD patients.